[Discuss] CentOS 6.0 finally passes QA testing

[jabr at blu.org (John Abreau)]

When I checked the QA calendar on Friday, it still showed QA signoff
and syncing to internal mirrors as Thursday, which I assumed meant that
the signoff was successful at last. I checked again Sunday, and the
calendar still showed this.

Tonight, the calendar shows that it's slipped another week. I guess
they just forgot to update the damn calendar.

So... what other clones do people recommend? I recall hearing mention
of Scientific Linux in the past; is this good as a general server OS?
Is it supported by repos such as EPEL and Rpmfusion?



On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod at wilsonet.com> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:37 PM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod at wilsonet.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 17, 2011, at 12:27 PM, John Abreau wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looks like CentOS 6.0 is finally being released. According to the QA calendar
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> ? ?http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/
>>>>
>>>> it's due to be pushed out to the download mirrors on Monday, and I assume
>>>> this means it should be generally available on Tuesday.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, Red Hat has already released Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.1, so
>>> they're still more than six months behind, and won't be getting most of
>>> the the key security fixes that do go into the 6.1 errata update kernels.
>>
>> I'm confused by this statement. ?I realize that Red Hat is no longer
>> distributing kernel
>> source in such a way as to allow someone to easily determine what each
>> patch does.
>
> It has absolutely nothing to do with that.
>
>
>> I don't, however, see how this matters if all one wants to do is run
>> the 'same' kernel
>> as Red Hat.
>
> You can run the "same" kernel as Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.0. Not 6.1.
> Therein lies the problem.
>
>
>> The monolithic source for the entire Red Hat kernel
>> should still be available.
>
> It is. But CentOS isn't in the kernel patching business. They're in the rebuild
> only business. And if they're still rebuilding just 6.0 after 6.1 has been
> released, then they're not getting the security and bug fixes that are backported
> from the 6.2 development tree into 6.1 errata kernels. As far as I know, Red Hat
> isn't going to continue patching 6.0 kernels now that 6.1 is released, which
> means that CentOS 6.0 users are going to be running kernels with known security
> vulnerabilities. I'd take a pass on using that in production, thank you. Use the
> real deal, or another clone that is more on top of things.
>
>
> --
> Jarod Wilson
> jarod at wilsonet.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix
AIM abreauj / JABBER jabr at jabber.blu.org / YAHOO abreauj / SKYPE zusa_it_mgr
Email jabr at blu.org / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9
PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99